DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Reid David MacIntosh Innes, OCT, Member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Vicki Shannon, OCT, Chair
Stefanie Achkewich, OCT
John Tucker
BETWEEN: ) ) Martin Zatovkanuk,
) Legal Counsel,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) for Ontario College of Teachers )
- and – )
) Robyn White,
REID DAVID MACINTOSH INNES ) Cavalluzzo Shilton McIntyre & Cornish,
(CERTIFICATE #479818) )
) for Reid David MacIntosh Innes
) Erica Richler,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: June 17, 2013
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on June 17, 2013 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
Reid David MacIntosh Innes (the “Member”) was not in attendance at the hearing.
A Notice of Hearing dated November 12, 2012 was served on the Member, requesting attendance before the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers on November 21, 2012 to set a date for a hearing and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for June 17, 2013.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations in the Notice of Hearing (Exhibit 1), dated November 12, 2012 are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Reid David MacIntosh Innes is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in subsection 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) in that:
(a) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(c) he committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18);
(d) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
Counsel for the College advised the Committee that subject to ratification by the Committee, agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced a Memorandum of Agreement (“MOA”), (Exhibit 3) which provides as follows:
Agreed Statement of Facts
The parties hereby agree to the truth and accuracy of the facts that are hereinafter expressed and agree to the receipt of this document by the Discipline Committee.
On July 22, 2011, the College received a letter of notification, dated June 30, 2011, from the Greater Essex County District School Board (the “Board”), regarding the Member, a contract teacher at Margaret D. Bennie Public School (the “School”) with the Board, pursuant to its obligation under section 43.2 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996.
The Board reported that as a result of surveillance, over a period of five school days the Member was recorded on video taking a total of $33.00 from a locked drawer in the School’s office.
On June 10, 2011, School and Board administration held a meeting with the Member regarding the above-noted matter. During this meeting, the Board indicated that it could establish that the Member had a key and had taken the money. The Member was informed that he would be suspended without pay and that there would be a recommendation for termination of his employment.
The Member resigned from the Board effective June 10, 2011.
On November 18, 2011, the Board received a letter from the Member enclosing a $100 cheque for restitution.
The Member acknowledges that he engaged in the alleged conduct. The Member states that he regrets his conduct and submits that the conduct in question was out of character and that it was an isolated occurrence. The Member states that he was experiencing financial difficulties at the time and that he made a mistake by engaging in the conduct. The Member states that he had never previously engaged in the same or similar conduct and, moreover, the Member states that he has not engaged in the same or similar conduct since the time period in question.
By this document, the Member pleads guilty to professional misconduct as alleged in the Notice of Hearing, issued on November 12, 2012, and in so doing, accepts as true the particulars set out in this section of the MOA.
The Member voluntarily admits the above particulars and understands that by doing so, he is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against him and the right to a contested hearing.
Joint Submission on Resolution
The parties agree to resolve the matter as follows:
the Member agrees and understands that upon ratification of this MOA, the Discipline Committee shall find him guilty of professional misconduct;
the Member shall appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers. The reprimand shall be delivered at the offices of the College located at 101 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario;
the Member agrees and understands that, within 120 calendar days of ratification of this MOA, he shall successfully complete a course of instruction, at his own expense, with a practitioner, pre-approved by the Registrar, covering ethical behaviour. The Member will provide a copy of this MOA to the course practitioner;
the Member agrees and undertakes that, within 30 days of completion of the above-noted course, he shall provide the Registrar a written report by the course practitioner confirming successful completion of the course of instruction;
the Member agrees and understands that upon ratification of this MOA, a notation shall be added on the public register maintained by the Registrar, in accordance with section 23 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996;
the Member agrees and understands that the College shall publish a summary of the complaint and its resolution as contained in this MOA. Such publication shall be made in the College’s official publication, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession, on the College web site, and in any other manner the Registrar and Chief Executive Officer deems appropriate. The parties have not agreed on whether or not the Member’s name and/or any identifying information should be included and submissions will be made on that issue.
the Member agrees and understands that upon ratification of this MOA, the College will maintain a copy of the Reasons for Decision, Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee, including this MOA, in the College and on the College’s website, in the College’s Margaret Wilson Library and in any other forum the Registrar deems appropriate;
the Member agrees and understands that upon ratification of this MOA, the College shall submit a copy of the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee to Quicklaw, an online legal database;
the Member agrees and understands that for the purpose of considering this matter, the Discipline Committee will be provided with this MOA and the Notice of Hearing, which will be marked as Exhibits and will constitute the evidence upon which the guilty plea will be accepted, the finding of guilt will be made, and the penalty will be imposed;
the parties agree and understand that if any phrase or paragraph of this MOA is deemed null and void, the MOA shall be read as though the phrase or paragraph was stricken from the MOA and the amended MOA shall remain in force and effect;
the Member agrees and understands that this MOA is the entire agreement between him and the College and that there have been no oral or written representations made by the College as an inducement or threat to enter into this MOA;
the parties agree and undertake that upon ratification of this MOA, there shall be no further action taken, no appeal to any forum, and no application for judicial review of the terms of the MOA; and,
each party may sign a separate copy of this MOA which, when so signed and delivered, shall be an original copy even though not signed by the other parties. All such separately signed copies shall together constitute evidence of all parties’ consent to be bound by this agreement.
DECISION
Having examined the Exhibits filed, and based on the Memorandum of Agreement, the guilty plea, and the submissions made by Counsel for the College and Counsel for the Member, the Committee ratifies the Memorandum of Agreement. The Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that Reid David MacIntosh Innes committed acts of professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Committee accepts the Member’s guilty plea and the agreed facts contained in the Memorandum of Agreement (Exhibit 3).
Over a five day period, the Member used a key to remove a total of $33.00 from a locked drawer in the School’s Office. The incidents were captured on video recordings. Following this incident, the Member was suspended without pay and informed that there would be a recommendation for termination of his employment. The Member resigned from the Board on the same day.
The Committee acknowledges that the Member has expressed remorse for his conduct and has made restitution to the School in the amount of $100.00.
The Committee finds that the Member’s actions amount to professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
SUBMISSIONS RE: PUBLICATION
Counsel for the College submitted that the Committee should order Publication of the findings and Order in summary with the Member’s name. Counsel for the College cited three factors for publication with name:
General Deterrence;
Specific Deterrence; and
Recommendation 33 of the LeSage Report.
Counsel for the College submitted that members should know that stealing, no matter the amount, results in serious consequences that should serve as a general deterrent. Counsel for the College further submitted that teachers are required to uphold a higher standard especially when public funds are at risk. Counsel for the College stated that publication would act as a specific deterrent as it would be public that the Member was sanctioned. Counsel for the College referred to Recommendation 33 of the LeSage report which calls for publication with name in every instance except when there is a publication ban or the Member is found not guilty. Neither exception applies in this instance.
Counsel for the Member submitted that while agreement had been reached on facts and penalty, the Member requested that his name not be published. Counsel for the Member stated that notwithstanding the need for transparency and the consideration of public interest, subsection 30, paragraph 3 of the Act provides the Committee with the discretion to publish without name.
Counsel for the Member emphasized that this and not the LeSage recommendation, is the law which governs this matter. Counsel for the Member submitted that the Committee should consider the Member’s right to privacy in balancing public interest and the fact that the Member does not relinquish all rights to privacy because he is a teacher. Counsel for the Member also stated that the Member was concerned with the impact of publication of his name on his own immediate and extended family members.
Counsel for the Member referred to a number of positive steps the Member had taken toward regaining employment as a teacher including the completion of Additional Qualification courses and volunteering at schools within his community. Counsel for the Member submitted that publication with the Member’s name could permanently harm his chances of securing future employment as a teacher. Counsel for the Member also made it very clear that police were never involved in the investigation of this incident and no charges were ever laid.
Counsel for the Member presented the Committee with two cases, both outlined far more serious thefts, one which did not result in publication with name as a result of the acceptance of a joint submission on resolution. Counsel for the Member submitted that public interest can be fully protected without the publication of the Member’s name.
Counsel for the College responded to the submission of Member’s counsel that a teacher does not relinquish all rights to privacy because he or she is a teacher. In fact, Counsel for the College maintained that when a teacher engages in conduct unbecoming the profession, they forfeit the right to privacy. Counsel for the College also pointed out that the mandate for Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession is to inform teachers of what kind of penalties can be expected for specific misconduct.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Resolution and makes the following order:
The Member is to appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers.
The Registrar is directed to impose the following terms, conditions or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such terms, conditions or limitations to be recorded on the Register of the College until such time as it is fulfilled:
(i) within 120 days of the ratification of the Memorandum of Agreement, the Member is to complete, at his own expense, a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar, covering ethical behaviour. The Member must provide the Registrar with written confirmation of his successful completion of this course, prepared by the course practitioner, within 30 calendar days of completion. The Member will provide a copy of this MOA to the course practitioner.
- Pursuant to paragraph 3 of subsection 5 of section 30 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, the findings and Order of the Committee shall be published in summary, with the name of the Member in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee carefully considered and accepted the Joint Submission on Resolution. In the Committee’s view, the Member breached the standards of the profession and engaged in conduct unbecoming a member of the teaching profession. The Committee agreed that a reprimand and the imposition of terms, conditions and limitations on the Member’s certificate is an appropriate resolution for conduct of this nature.
The Committee accepts that the Member indicated that this was an isolated occurrence; he was experiencing financial difficulties at the time and had never previously engaged in the same or similar conduct nor has since.
The Committee accepts the argument of Counsel for the College that once a teacher engages in conduct unbecoming the profession, there is a need to inform other members of the profession of the consequences for such behaviour which includes publication with name.
Publication of the findings and order, with the Member’s name, responds to the need for transparency and accountability and serves the public interest, as well as informing the profession of the consequences of unethical behaviour. Publication, with the Member’s name, acts as a specific deterrent to the Member and as a general deterrent to the profession from engaging in similar misconduct.
The Committee is satisfied that this decision is appropriate in the circumstances and serves and protects the public interest.
Date: June 17, 2013
Vicki Shannon, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
______________________________ Stefanie Achkewich, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel ______________________________
John Tucker
Member, Discipline Panel